
We no longer have an education system that works. This is true for most people that need education. A few people still find value in the current system, but it is no longer a system that works for the masses. It is no longer a democratic education system. It has become a school system devoid of the benefits and value that it once had. We now are stuck with a school system designed for the nineteenth century that is expensive, inefficient and much less effective than it could be. This is true not only in America but also for most of the world.
Times have changed. Needs have changed. Our education system has not changed. It no longer meets the needs of a world economy that has gone from agriculture to industry to information. A world that has gone from analog to digital. Changes from the nineteenth century to the twenty first century are incomprehensible. Changes in our education system have not kept up with the needs of a modern world. Outside of growing larger and more expensive, our education system is still based on nineteenth century principles of education.

Nothing is more important to a nation than a democratic education system. A system that provides equal opportunity to all regardless of gender, age, race, ethnicity, income or religion. Education provides the knowledge and information that is the foundation for all successful endeavors. Whether it is a building a great company, finding a cure for a disease, writing a musical masterpiece, developing innovative technology to help people or even fighting a war to defend a country, nothing was ever accomplished without knowledge. Knowledge may not always be developed in an education system, but an education system is the primary mode of transferal for knowledge. From Caesar to Leonardo Da Vinci, from Shakespeare to Einstein and from Henry Ford to Mark Zuckerberg, it was education that gave them the knowledge to be successful.
Today we have an elite system of schooling whereby the children of the wealthy get to go to charter schools, private schools and high-priced universities that are beyond the incomes of the average person. These schools may still provide a decent education, but they are “not open to the public.” This morphing of schools from democratic institutions to elite institutions did not happen by accident. It became all too clear to many people that the public-school system was collapsing. Anyone who has taught in a public school today knows the chaos and bedlam that is called education in these schools. Discipline has gone out the door and students terrorize each other and even the teachers. The results of the decay of the public-school system has seen the wealthy shift their funding to private schools while those who cannot afford private schools often opt for home schooling. The rise in home schooling parallels the decline of the public-school system.
Teachers sit helplessly by as the school system they belong to sinks slowly but inevitably beneath the waves of societal change. Like the proverbial fish, teachers are the last ones to see the water. Asking a teacher how to fix the system is like asking a fish how to fix the ocean. Adding to the general ignorance are pundits in both the business arena and the political arena who propose solutions based on what worked in the past or worse what they think has worked in the business arena. Thus, we see proposed solutions such as:
- More standardized testing for students
- State wide tests for teacher competency
- Pay for performance
- Guards in the school hallways
- More money for education
- Smaller class sizes
None of these solutions will work. None of them have worked. That is why the rich and privileged have opted to destroy public education by under-funding the present school system. Teachers all over are clamoring for more money both for salaries and also school improvements. While teachers and staff certainly deserve a higher pay for the jobs they do, and students deserve decent facilities, none of the changes that money will bring will improve the school system. There is a simple but profound reason for this and anyone understanding the concepts of systems change and paradigm shifts will clearly know why.
First, in a system all processes are linked, and each impacts the other. To change a system, you must change the assumptions upon which a system is based. A paradigm is a set of assumptions that govern how processes are developed and allocated. As Thomas Kuhn noted in his book “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” when a paradigm changes what worked in the old paradigm will not work in the new paradigm. Paradigms change when the underlying forces of a society fundamentally change. These forces include economic, social, technological, political, legal, environmental and even spiritual factors.
“In order to displace a prevailing theory or paradigm in science, it is not enough to merely point out what it cannot explain; you have to offer a new theory that explains more data and do so in a testable way.” — Michael Shermer
In lieu of a train load of data that would make Michael Shermer happy, would you accept that societal forces have changed rather dramatically from the nineteenth century to today? Do you think that the type of business model that worked in the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century would still work today? Do you think Zuckerberg or Musk or Brin or Bezos could run their business like Ford or Carnegie or Rockefeller ran their businesses in today’s world? I think the obvious answer to these questions effectively addresses the need for a paradigm change.
Yet we are not seeing a paradigm change in education. Even as I write this, teachers are striking all over America for more money. We are still trying to run our education system on the principles and assumptions that nineteenth century education was based on. These include the following:
- Schooling should not start until about six or seven years of age
- Students need a standardized education curriculum
- Students need to proceed in assembly line fashion one grade at a time
- Students should take courses that match their age level
- Students need tests and diplomas to ensure that they are qualified to go on to the next level of education
- Students need to go to school in one place
- Most education will take place in a classroom
- The teacher is the expert and knows what knowledge the student needs
- College is the best place to go after high school
- Students should go to school Monday through Friday
- Students should finish school and then go on to a career
- Public education funding is only through high school
Now, what if all these assumptions were no longer valid? What if they were valid in the nineteenth and even twentieth century but are no longer valid today? What if we turned them upside down and built an education system on the opposite assumptions?
- Schooling should start as soon as possible perhaps as early as two or three years of age
- Students need a customized education curriculum
- Students proceed according to their progress regardless of age level
- Students take courses that match their interests and abilities
- Students need tests only to determine their level of understanding and not for passing or failing
- Students need to go to facilities that match their interests regardless of where they are in the community
- Most education will take place in customized facilities
- The teacher is a facilitator and has the responsibility to aid the student in pursuing their interests
- College is not the best place for all students
- Students can go to school on flexible schedules
- Students never finish schooling and education is life long and career based
- Public education funding is life-long as needs and careers change
Can you imagine if we designed an education system based on the above assumptions rather the assumptions in the first list? You would have a totally different education system. In some ways, it might be like the change in business models from mass production to mass customization. We would still have a public education system, but it would be customized to meet the individual needs of each student.
“Given the rapid rate of change, the old paradigm of one-off education followed by a career will no longer work: life-long learning is a must, and it is up to governments and employers to invest in training and for employees to commit to constantly update their skill set.” — Alain Dehaze
Many young people who are now either lost in the present system of schooling or who are ill-served by it would be rejuvenated and excited again. Classrooms would no longer be places where the concept of discipline permeated every minute of instruction. There would be no such thing as failures or dropouts. No such thing as staying back or not passing. No detention or hall monitors. Vocational education, music, art, and drama would be as important as reading and math and science. Poor kids would get the same education as
rich kids. All kids would find joy and fun in their education since it would be designed to meet their needs and interests and unique abilities. People from two to ninety-two would be able to receive the education and knowledge they need to be effective members of society regardless of whether they had yet begun to work or had retired. Education would be for life. Public funding would be provided throughout a person’s lifetime.
“Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.” — John Dewey
Some will read this blog and call my vision either Pollyannish or unrealistic. I have spent many hours arguing with people over the need for change in our education system. There is nothing unrealistic or even idealistic about my vision. It does not represent an ideal. It represents a decision. Either we are going to have an education system that benefits all of our citizens or we are going to have a system that only benefits a few. It is not an ideal. It is a choice we can make. Do we have the determination to change a failing system and to look beyond the norms of the past? Can we take our mental model of education and exchange it for a new model of education? Either we are going to progress, or we are going to decline. The direction we go will be based on what we do with our education system.
Time for Questions:
The Socratic Method was based on what? Why did Socrates feel his method was a better one to instruct his students? What is “Critical Thinking?” Do we teach “Critical Thinking” in our schools? Do you know? Do you think we should? Why or why not?
Life is just beginning.
“The function of education is to teach one to think intensively and to think critically. Intelligence plus character – that is the goal of true education.” — Martin Luther King, Jr.





Once upon a time I had more friends on Facebook. I had both Democratic friends, Republican Friends and friends who cared not one whit about politics. Many of all political persuasions were friends who simply wanted to ignore politics. During the run-up to Trump’s election, I discussed, debated, argued, reasoned and fought with many friends who wanted to support Trump. The results were not pretty. Zero changed their minds. I was angry and frustrated.









My first real hero was Ming the Merciless. He had all the primary characteristics of an evil genius. He was a megalomaniac who wanted to rule the world. He was always smarter than Flash Gordon. He had dozens of minions who followed his every order. He obeyed no rules except his own. And finally, he lusted after Dale Arden who was a pretty hot babe for the time. Dale had wonderful blond curls, a great figure and was into bare midriff before it became popular in the 90’s. Flash was a wimp when it came to Dale but Ming the Merciless knew what he wanted and really went after it. I suppose tying women up today would not be proper but if you are an evil genius it is simply part of the expectations.
My second Hero was Dr. Fu Manchu. A character created by the writer Sax Rohmer. Fu was as evil as they came. He was a brilliant megalomaniac. He obeyed no rules or laws except his own. He was alleged to hold doctorates from four Western universities. Unlike the wimpy college professors who one associates with a Ph.D. degree, there was nothing wimpy about Dr. Fu Manchu. He would not hesitate to murder anyone who got in his way. In the 1932 film, The Mask of Fu Manchu, Fu tells an assembled group of his minions that they must “kill the white men and take their women.” Evil geniuses have a knack for thinking big and ignoring the normal bonds of propriety and civility.
As is usual with evil geniuses, Moriarty was always one step ahead of Sherlock. Perhaps because it was still the Victorian age, Moriarty did not have much to do with lusting after women. There was no kidnapping, tying women up or forced kissing in any of the Moriarty tales. However, Sherlock was not much better in the womanizing category and seemed to be a confirmed bachelor. His main relationship with a woman was with his housekeeper Mrs. Hudson which always stayed platonic.
Von Doom. You must love someone with a name like that. Dr. Doom was evil and ruthless and a certified genius. He had many gadgets and inventions that enabled him to defeat an entire pantheon of superheroes. When it came to bad, he took a back seat to no one. Imagine, someone who would let his childhood sweetheart be savagely sacrificed so that he could gain the power to rule the world. Yes, like most other evil geniuses, Dr. Doom was also a megalomaniac who wanted to rule the world.
I have not had time to describe all the evil geniuses whom I have loved and admired. I have given you only a few of the ones who have punctuated my life. I do not have the space to do justice (sic) to some of my other heroes such as Lex Luther, the Kingpin, The Joker, Green Goblin and of course Sauron. By the way, recently we had a female megalomaniac out to destroy the world. It was quite refreshing to see how Hela kicked Thor’s butt from one end of Asgard to the other. But to bring you up to the present, I have now found perhaps the most evil genius in history. He has all the truly great characteristics of evilness. He is also a genius.




publish their lists of the most beautiful people in the world. Beautiful people marry other beautiful people and are constantly in the news. The Kardashians would seem to have few talents except their almost incredible beauty. Rich men marry beautiful women. Beautiful actresses marry NFL football players. Beautiful heiresses marry rock stars while beautiful rock stars marry record producers.

I once asked my MBA students whether they would rather be smart or beautiful. They almost unanimously selected beautiful. I was very surprised but the more I have observed about life, the more it would seem that beauty will get you further than brains. Brains can get you some things but being nerdy is not one of the things that most people aspire to. Anti-intellectualism is a fact of American life as noted by Richard Hofstadter in his famous book: “Anti-intellectualism in American Life, 1963.”
As we both have aged, the process of deterioration taking place in our bodies is clear in the more wrinkled, wizened and paunchy body shapes we now exhibit. While neither of us was ever beautiful by societies standards, we never had any chance of making any top ten beautiful lists before and certainly not today. Nevertheless, when I see my spouse in her pajamas or in the shower or when she cuddles up in bed with me, I can’t help but think how beautiful she is and how much I love her. While I still see the shades of societies standards of beauty in the many young models punctuating my daily life, the beauty I see in my wife is something I cannot describe. It is a beauty that comes from who she is and not how she looks. I only know she is more beautiful to me today than she was 35 years ago when we first started dating.
You can claim as you grow older that you either have regrets or you have no regrets. I have had at least one friend who on his deathbed made the claim that he had no regrets. I admired his attitude very much. I wanted to emulate this attitude as I grew older, but try as I might it has escaped me. I can tell you I have no regrets, but it would be a big lie. I have enough regrets to write a book about. One of my regrets is that I am shorter than my father was. He was six feet four inches
tall and I barely make five feet eight inches. Mostly though, I wonder what it would have been like to have been born handsome. To have had the looks of Paul Newman, Sean Connery, Brad Pitt or Robert Redford. Would I have used my looks to achieve fame and fortune or would I have simply squandered it away on wine, women and song? How much different would my life have been if I had been a “beautiful” person?
I understand and fully believe that like ingratitude, (Please read my blog on

As Americans, we pride ourselves on being the exact opposite of Communists. In America, we have a democracy. To live in a democracy, means that you are “free” to think for yourself. No one living in a democracy can possibly be brainwashed. In America, “the land of the free and the home of the brave” you will only find people who believe in the truth. The truth is that democracy is the holy grail of political systems. It supports everything that is good about life. In a democracy, all men and women are created equal. In a democracy, everyone can succeed if they only have the right desire. Americans will fight and die for this dream.




UNITED STATES

John: I prefer voluptuous.
Alexa: Mary has some questions for you John.
John: Alexa!
John: Alexa! Where is the best place to get a pizza in Casa Grande for Saturday night?










